
Here are few examples of previous judgements from various courts.
Case-1
Ranganathachar Agnihotri v. State of Mysore (1966):
- The State rejected the petitioner’s appointment because he was an active member of RSS, alleging it was “subversive, secretive and opposed to secularism.”
- The Court found no evidence supporting these allegations.
- RSS was not a banned or unlawful organisation under any law.
- The Government produced no material showing that RSS activities were subversive or unconstitutional.
- The petitioner’s documents showed RSS was a cultural and service organisation, promoting discipline, unity and character building.
- Mere membership of RSS cannot make a person unsuitable for judicial service.
- Suitability must be judged on character and conduct, not on ideological association.
- The Government’s decision was based on irrelevant considerations and was therefore arbitrary.
- The Court held that denying appointment on RSS membership violated equality principles under Articles 14 and 16.
- Directed the State to appoint the petitioner as Munsiff according to his merit rank.
Case-2
Ram Phal v. State of Punjab(1967):
- Petitioner, a government servant, attended an RSS rally and training camp.
- He was dismissed for alleged violation of Conduct Rules—participation in a “political movement.”
- Petitioner argued RSS is a cultural, not political, organisation promoting discipline and unity.
- Court held—mere participation in RSS activities doesn’t automatically mean political involvement.
- Government must prove that RSS activity was of a political nature to justify punishment.
- No enquiry or evidence was produced to show RSS was a political movement.
- Hence, dismissal was illegal and unconstitutional.
- Court reaffirmed—membership or participation in RSS alone isn’t misconduct under Conduct Rules.
Case-3
Chintamani Nurganwankar v. Post Master General (1962):
- RSS was not a banned or unlawful organisation at the time.
- Mere association or membership with RSS is not proof of subversive activity.
- Allegations must show what RSS activities were subversive — otherwise, they have no legal basis.
- Attendance at RSS functions or visits to its office are innocuous acts, not threats to national security.
- Government cannot take disciplinary or security action solely based on RSS association without concrete evidence of subversive conduct.
Many Other Examples:
- Indore Madhya Bharat High Court (1955):
’Krishna Lal Vs Madhya Bharat State’ –
Court Ruling – “No Temporary Government Employee can be removed stating that he is a Member of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh.” - Patna High Court (1961):
’Madhavrao Sadashivrao Golwalkar Vs Bihar State’
Court Ruling – “Speech given at a Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh programme is not an offence under Section 153A of Indian Penal Code IPC.” - Bombay High Court Nagpur Bench (1962):
‘Chintamani Nurganwankar Vs Post Master General K. M., Nagpur’s*
Court Ruling – “Any Govt Employee participating in Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh activities is not resorting to ‘Deistructive Work’ and no one can be removed from Govt service based on this.”
- Uttar Pradesh High Court (1963):
’Jai Kishan Mahrotra Vs Mahalekhakar, Uttar Pradesh’s
Court Ruling – “Being a Member of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh cannot be the only reason for Compulsory Retirement of any Govt Employee.”
- Rajasthan High Court, Jodhpur (1964):
’Kedarlal Agarwal Vs Rajasthan State and Others’
Court Ruling – “Dismissal of a Govt Employee on the basis of his active participation in Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh activities will be null & void.”
- Punjab High Court, Delhi (1965):
’Manohar Ambokar Vs Bharat Sangh & Other’s
Court Ruling – Participating in Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh activities can be termed ‘neither ‘Destructive Work’ nor ‘Illegal’. No Govt Employee can be Punished on this basis.”
- Mysore High Court, Bangalore (1966):
’Ranganathachar Agnihotri Vs Mysore State & Other’s
Court Ruling – “Being a member of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh can’t be a valid reason to deprive an individual an opportunity to be appointed as a Justice”
- Punjab & Haryana High Court, Chandigarh (1967):
’Ramphal Vs Punjab State & Others’
Court Ruling – “No Govt Employee can be dismissed on basis of his participation in Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh Camps.”
- Madhya Pradesh High Court, Jabalpur (1973):
’Bharat Prasad Tripathi Vs Madhya Pradesh Govt & Other’s
Court Ruling – “No Employee can be removed on basis of his participation in a Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh programme. Any orders issued for the Sake of justifying the same will not be valid.”
- Uttar Pradesh High Court (1971):
’Education Director, Uttar Pradesh & Others Vs Revat Prakash Pandey’
Court Ruling – “No citizen’s ‘Right of confluence’ can be suspended during his Government Service.”
- Gujrat High Court, Ahmedabad (1970):
’D.B. Gohal Vs District Judge, Bhawnagar & Other’s
Court Ruling – “Relation with Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh doesn’t proves that it is a Political Protest, hence no Govt Employee can be removed from his service based on this point.”
- Kerala High Court, Ernakulam (1981):
’T.B. Anandan & Others Vs Kerala State & Other’s
Court Ruling – “The Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh cannot be deprived of Special Facility of Government School for their Programmes.”
- Kerala High Court, Ernakulam (1982):
’Smt Thatumkar Vs General Manager, Tele Communications, Kerala Mondal’
Court Ruling – “No individual can be stopped from being appointed as a Government Employee on basis of his being a Member of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh.”
- Indian High Court (1983):
’Madhya Pradesh State Vs Ram Shankar Raghuwanshi & Other’s
Court Ruling – “No Employee can be removed from Service on the basis of him participating in Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh Activities.”